DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 2, 4-9, 14 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The claims will be examined as best understood.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the interface". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 4-6, 9 are rejected as based upon a rejected base claim.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "the interface". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
For claims 2, 4-8, where precisely is the convergence point(s)? In the instant specification: “the first convergence point may be located at a separation plane of the separation interface” and “The first convergence point may be located on a longitudinal axis of the first hole”. Is the convergence point where the axis and plane meet? Is the convergence point dependent upon differing structure or the joining of the first and second bracket?
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 11 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Poncet et al (US 10017279).
In regards to claim 11, Poncet discloses a hold and release mechanism ("HRM") system for releasably holding a deployable payload in a stowed configuration, the system comprising:
a first HRM bracket configured to connect to a first deployable payload (Fig. 12 ref. 23);
a second HRM bracket configured to connect to a second deployable payload (Fig. 12 ref. 24);
a third HRM bracket configured to connect to a platform on which the first and second deployable payloads are stowed (Fig. 12 brackets ref. 23, 24 mirrored in four portions of ref. 12 seen in Figs. 2 and 7);
a retaining device comprising a HRM bolt (Poncet ref. 26), the retaining device configured to releasably hold the first and second HRM brackets and second and third HRM brackets together at first and second separation interfaces of the HRM system, respectively, by holding the HRM bolt (Poncet when ref. 26 remains in place, refs. 12 on corners of payload are held in place),
the retaining device configured to release the hold upon receiving a release input to the retaining device to allow separation at the first and second separation interfaces (Poncet C11:35 discloses release input/command for separation, “The control device for the state of the locking devices can either be aboard the launcher or comprise several modules each aboard one of satellites S1 to S5 or a satellite from a group. The command can be programmed in the control device or be emitted from the ground”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 1, 2, 4-8, 10, 13, 15, 18 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Poncet et al (US 10017279) in view of Plaza Baonza (US 20110113605; hereinafter Plaza).
In regards to claim 1, Poncet discloses a hold and release mechanism ("HRM") system for releasably holding a deployable payload in a stowed configuration, the system comprising:
a first HRM bracket (Fig. 12, comprising ref. 12b) comprising:
a first bracket body having a conical portion (Fig. 12 ref. 24, upper portion); and a first bracket connector for connecting the first HRM bracket to the deployable payload (ref. 25, connecting by way of one or more intermediate elements);
a second HRM bracket (Fig. 12, comprising ref. 12a) comprising:
a second bracket body having a portion (Fig. 12 ref. 23, lower portion); and
a second bracket connector for connecting the second HRM bracket to a platform on which the first deployable payload is stowed (ref. 25, connecting by way of one or more intermediate elements); and
a retaining device configured to releasably hold the first and second bracket bodies together in the stowed configuration (comprising at least ref. 26), wherein the conical portion of the first bracket body nests with the conical portion of the second bracket body or the conical portion of the second bracket body nests in the conical portion of the first bracket body to form a separation interface of the HRM system (as suggest in Fig. 12).
Poncet does not expressly disclose: the portion of the first bracket and the portion of the second bracket are conical.
Plaza teaches conical separation couplings (as seen in Fig. 1B and Fig. 2A).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify, with the reasonable expectation of success, Poncet with Plaza by providing the portion of the first bracket and the portion of the second bracket are conical in order to provide for quick coupling and alignment during assembly.
In regards to claim 2, Poncet discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the first HRM bracket further comprises a first strut connecting the first bracket body to the first bracket connector (Poncet seen in Figs. 2, 7 ref. 12 connecting by way of one or more intermediate elements), the first strut configured to release moments resulting from the interface of the first and second bracket bodies at the separation interface in the stowed configuration (Poncet ref. 12 capable of transmitting/releasing forces from the interface between brackets or into further structure).
In regards to claim 4, Poncet discloses the system of claim 2, wherein the first strut is configured such that lines of action of the first strut converge to a first convergence point (Poncet, in Fig. 12 vertical line through ref. 26, follows upward movement of strut, point where both brackets are joined).
In regards to claim 5, Poncet discloses the system of claim 4, wherein the first convergence point is located at a separation plane of the separation interface (Poncet Fig. 12 point where refs. 23 and 24 are coupled together).
In regards to claim 6, Poncet discloses the system of claim 4, wherein the first bracket body includes a first hole configured to receive a rod or bolt of the retaining device (Poncet as suggested in Fig. 12, hole for ref. 26) and wherein the first convergence point is located on a longitudinal axis of the first hole (Poncet, in Fig. 12 vertical line through ref. 26).
In regards to claim 7, Poncet discloses the system of claim 3, wherein the second HRM bracket comprises a second strut configured such that lines of action of the second strut converge to a second convergence point (Poncet ref. 12 mirrored for lower/second strut for payload stack).
In regards to claim 8, Poncet discloses the system of claim 7, wherein the first convergence point and the second convergence point are collocated (Poncet, in Fig. 12 vertical line through ref. 26, convergence at joint of upper and lower portions).
In regards toc claim 10, Poncet discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the conical portion of the first bracket body or the conical portion of the second bracket body is frustoconical (Poncet as combined, Plaza Fig. 1B and 2A frustoconical coupling).
In regards to claim 13, Poncet discloses a method of holding a deployable payload by a HRM system in a stowed configuration for subsequent release, the method comprising:
nesting a portion of a first bracket in a portion of a second bracket for forming a first separation interface in the stowed configuration (Poncet Fig. 12 detail view, Figs. 8, 9 nesting of further payload);
connecting the first bracket to the deployable payload and the second bracket to a platform on which the first deployable payload is stowed in the stowed configuration, or vice versa (Poncet Fig. 10, ref. 21b platform/payload adapter, connected by means of one or more intermediate elements);
releasably holding, by a retaining device (Poncet ref. 26), the first and second brackets together at the separation interface (Poncet Fig. 12 ref. 26), the retaining device configured to release the hold of the retaining device upon receipt of a release input by the retaining device (C11:35 discloses release input/command for separation, “The control device for the state of the locking devices can either be aboard the launcher or comprise several modules each aboard one of satellites S1 to S5 or a satellite from a group. The command can be programmed in the control device or be emitted from the ground”).
Poncet does not expressly disclose: the portion of the first bracket and the portion of the second bracket are conical.
Plaza teaches conical separation couplings (as seen in Fig. 1B and Fig. 2A).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify, with the reasonable expectation of success, Poncet with Plaza by providing the portion of the first bracket and the portion of the second bracket are conical in order to provide for quick coupling and alignment during assembly.
In regards to claim 15, Poncet discloses the method of claim 13 but does not expressly disclose: wherein the retaining device comprises a breakable component configured to break upon receipt of the release input by the retaining device, the break of the breakable component to allow separation at the separation interface.
Plaza teaches a breakable bolt to separate a connection coupling between payload and carrier ([0079] “The releasing device is preferably a separation nut assembly, either pyrotechnically or non-explosively actuated”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify, with the reasonable expectation of success, Poncet with Plaza by providing the retaining device comprises a breakable component configured to break upon receipt of the release input by the retaining device and the break of the breakable component to allow separation at the separation interface in order to provide for faster response to separation signal.
In regards to claim 18, Poncet as combined discloses the method of 13, further comprising delivering the release input to the retaining device to release the hold (Poncet C11:35 discloses release input/command for separation, accordingly delivering input)
Claim 9, 14 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Poncet, Plaza as applied to claim 2, 13 above, and further in view of Barnett et al (US 4860974).
In regards to claim 9, Poncet discloses the system of claim 2, but does not expressly disclose: wherein the first strut is configured in a simple lattice structure or a complex lattice structure.
Barnett teaches an arm/strut comprising lattice (as seen in Fig. 4 ref. 18).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify, with the reasonable expectation of success, Poncet with Barnett by providing the first strut is configured in a simple lattice structure or a complex lattice structure in order to provide for less weight while providing strength.
In regards to claim 14, Poncet as combined discloses the method of claim 13 but does not expressly disclose: wherein at least one of the first bracket and the second bracket comprise a plurality of struts configured to release moments resulting from the interface of the first bracket with at least one other bracket.
Barnett teaches an arm/strut comprising lattice structure, the structure of struts (as seen in Fig. 4 ref. 18, capable of transmitting/releasing forces from the interface between brackets or into further structure)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify, with the reasonable expectation of success, Poncet with Barnett by providing at least one of the first bracket and the second bracket comprise a plurality of struts configured to release moments resulting from the interface of the first bracket with at least one other bracket in order to provide for less weight while providing strength.
Claim 12 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Poncet in view of Plaza.
In regards to calm 12, Poncet discloses the HRM system of claim 11, but does not expressly disclose: wherein the HRM bolt is configured to break upon receipt of the release input by the retaining device thereby releasing the hold of the retaining device.
Plaza teaches a breakable bolt to separate a connection coupling between a payload and carrier ([0079] “The releasing device is preferably a separation nut assembly, either pyrotechnically or non-explosively actuated”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify, with the reasonable expectation of success, Poncet with Plaza by providing the HRM bolt is configured to break upon receipt of the release input by the retaining device thereby releasing the hold of the retaining device in order to provide for faster response to separation signal.
Claim 16, 17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Poncet, Plaza as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Ahmed et al (US 6939073).
In regards to claim 16, Poncet as combined discloses the method of claim 13, wherein releasably holding the first and second brackets together comprises: disposing a bolt of the retaining device through the first and second brackets (Poncet as seen in Fig. 12 for ref. 26); holding the bolt at a second end of the bolt (Poncet Fig. 12 bolt head of ref. 26, holds in place on ref. 15);
Poncet does not expressly disclose: preloading the bolt by retracting the bolt from a first end to compress the first and second brackets together.
Ahmed teaches separation bolts which are preloaded/tightened via bolt head, thus retracting the bolt as it is tightened (Fig. 2 ref. 9).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify, with the reasonable expectation of success, Poncet with Ahmed by providing preloading the bolt by retracting the bolt from a first end to compress the first and second brackets together as is well known in the art.
In regards to claim 17, Poncet as combined discloses the method of claim 16, wherein retracting the bolt comprises torquing down the bolt (Poncet as combined, Ahmed ref. 9 threaded for torquing to secure in place).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure cited on PTO 892. The cited references display separation devices for satellites and payloads of launch vehicles.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICENTE RODRIGUEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-4798. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 7-5.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, JOSHUA HUSON can be reached at 571-270-5301. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/V.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3642
/MEDHAT BADAWI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Prosecution Insights